Does China possess the technical ability to develop MIRV technology for ICBM?

[kroko]

You said "china's long range BM didnt' advance as much as other areas because they didn't have access russian tech"... Rephrasing it, you're saying other areas advanced more because they had access to russian tech(?). So the advancement(another word for development) in said other areas were, to a large extent, contingent on russian tech.

Corrected it for you.

Also, there has been development in long range BM, but it may not have been as much as other areas namely because the threat of nuclear war is secondary compared to the threat of conventional war (so IRBMs, LACMs and SRBMs are taking priority along with everything else from aircraft to ships).

I have mentioned this before in this forum. Its probable that the PLA doesnt give much priority to nuclear weapons as they give to conventional ones. That may contribute also to the low advancement in numbers of the ICBM arsenal

 

[Broccoli]

At least the original DF-31 was a single warhead design, but in the later versions RV area is covered with a shroud. That shroud makes it impossible to say if the missile is carrying more than one warhead.

Here is what nuclearweaponarchive is saying about Chinese tests in 90's, if that all is true Chinese MIRVs have 100-300kt yield.

The final test series concluded in the spring and summer of 1996. According to Japanese government sources (reported in Nihon Keizai Shimbun), the penultimate underground Chinese nuclear test on 8 June 1996 (calculated at 20 to 80 kilotons) was actually a simultaneous detonation of multiple warheads (a common practice by both the U.S. and USSR). It was said to be part of a program to produce smaller warheads for submarine-launched and multiple-targeted missiles. Overall, the yields since 1990 have suggested that two warheads have been in development: one in the 100-300 kt range, and one in the 600-700 kt range.

I'm not sure why Kristensen says that Chinese would not want to have MIRVs, if you have less missiles than enemy then wouldn't MIRVs make even more sense?

 

[paintgun]

one would try to stick with single warheads if they are not confident with their MIRV technologies
ensuring the warhead delivery success would be a priority before deploying multiple warheads and or other warhead modifications

but like Igor said, if it's 1992 the topic could have been a valid one

we just need to look at the civilian launches to see what China's capable of, multi micro satellites and payload piggybacking has been done many times

 

[In4ser]

Nothing conclusive but Think Tanks like the Claremont Institute depicts the DF-31 having multiple MIRVs:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Then again...they may ulterior motives like drumming up the dangers of Nuclear Missile threats i.e. name.

 

[Lion]

Corrected it for you.



I have mentioned this before in this forum. Its probable that the PLA doesnt give much priority to nuclear weapons as they give to conventional ones. That may contribute also to the low advancement in numbers of the ICBM arsenal

Are you sure? Second artillery is one of the most well funded.. Compare to other wings.

 

[Broccoli]

Some of those sites use outdated NATO designation when it comes to DF-31.

Here is designations what Pentagon uses.
DF-31 = CSS-10 Mod 1
DF-31A = CSS-10 Mod 2

 

[CottageLV]

It depends what kind of proof you'd like to see ? .. want to see the inside of actual DF-31A or JL-2A or when China send it and blast it to India ? .. you can believe what you want to believe .... or you can keep asking any non sense question/proof just to deny it, perhaps like your baby "steppers"

... actually I haven't seen your post regarding your baby "steppers" to deny all Chinese advancement for a while now ? because there is no PROOF of China producing "Steppers" or perhaps you just don't know it .. and make an assumption, stupid one

how old are you?

---------- Post added at 12:48 PM ---------- Previous post was at 12:29 PM ----------

A lot of breakthroughs in this area were made in the 70s and early 80s. The military R&D were slowed down due to short of fund, because the Chinese government put most of the funds into developing the economy. The pace was picked up again in the late 90s and early 2000s, but those technologies are not like making a car, which can be done in few months if you really put money into it. They take a lot of time and effort.

Plus, can do and will do are two totally different concepts. There are a lot of things we can do but will not do it. Most of us could afford a brand new Ferrari if we sold our house, wife and kids, plus sell a few organs. But that doesn't mean you will do that.

MIRV technologies was perfected in the height of the cold war, both sides tried their best to kill each other. It was either go big or go home; if you didn't have something to match the enemy, you will die. China is in a totally different situation at this stage. Yes, there might be a few potential competitors, but overall it is a peaceful era. I'm sure they have some sort of program that is dedicated to this technology, but we can't be absolute in asserting the idea that it is already perfected.

You can't be 100% certain with your claims just because it is possible. NASA could technically excavate Helium 3 from the moon in the next 10 years, if the congress gave them few hundred billion and a gun behind the scientist's family's head. Even fission based nuclear powerplants could be possible in the next 20 years, if you have a life/death situation for the human race that pushes us to devote everything into it.

Thrust vectoring technology is a great example. I have even personally have seen few scenes of the prototype on CCTV. Looking by the style of clothes the researchers wore, it was probably filmed in the early 90s. But to this day, we still haven't seen any thrust vectored engines on Chinese jets.

Another example is ballistic vests. They are cheap and effective compared to other military hardware, we think it would be obvious for the PLA to equip it at mass scale. But to this date, it still haven't happened yet. So far, even special ops rarely wear them.

---------- Post added at 12:52 PM ---------- Previous post was at 12:48 PM ----------

China had blackhawks and chinooks for 20+ years, fast approaching 30. We would think China would now be able to come up with something similar. It seems so obvious. But did it happen yet?

 

[below_freezing]

how old are you?

---------- Post added at 12:48 PM ---------- Previous post was at 12:29 PM ----------

A lot of breakthroughs in this area were made in the 70s and early 80s. The military R&D were slowed down due to short of fund, because the Chinese government put most of the funds into developing the economy. The pace was picked up again in the late 90s and early 2000s, but those technologies are not like making a car, which can be done in few months if you really put money into it. They take a lot of time and effort.

Plus, can do and will do are two totally different concepts. There are a lot of things we can do but will not do it. Most of us could afford a brand new Ferrari if we sold our house, wife and kids, plus sell a few organs. But that doesn't mean you will do that.

MIRV technologies was perfected in the height of the cold war, both sides tried their best to kill each other. It was either go big or go home; if you didn't have something to match the enemy, you will die. China is in a totally different situation at this stage. Yes, there might be a few potential competitors, but overall it is a peaceful era. I'm sure they have some sort of program that is dedicated to this technology, but we can't be absolute in asserting the idea that it is already perfected.

You can't be 100% certain with your claims just because it is possible. NASA could technically excavate Helium 3 from the moon in the next 10 years, if the congress gave them few hundred billion and a gun behind the scientist's family's head. Even fission based nuclear powerplants could be possible in the next 20 years, if you have a life/death situation for the human race that pushes us to devote everything into it.

Thrust vectoring technology is a great example. I have even personally have seen few scenes of the prototype on CCTV. Looking by the style of clothes the researchers wore, it was probably filmed in the early 90s. But to this day, we still haven't seen any thrust vectored engines on Chinese jets.

Another example is ballistic vests. They are cheap and effective compared to other military hardware, we think it would be obvious for the PLA to equip it at mass scale. But to this date, it still haven't happened yet. So far, even special ops rarely wear them.

---------- Post added at 12:52 PM ---------- Previous post was at 12:48 PM ----------

China had blackhawks and chinooks for 20+ years, fast approaching 30. We would think China would now be able to come up with something similar. It seems so obvious. But did it happen yet?

You are right. China cannot develop MIRV. China can only launch 3 satellites with 1 rocket in 1981 into discrete orbits, which has absolutely no relation to MIRV :lol:

I can't post links so just google "China multiple satellite launch 1981"

China absolutely has no bulletproof vests. That is because bulletproof vests are high tech Western things, and low tech copy paste China cannot make them. China only has things that look like, and function like, bulletproof vests, but are not bulletproof vests.

 

[CottageLV]

There's a huge difference between technical capability and political/budgeting priorities. The technical capability is there, but I think the bigwigs in Beijing just don't believe that a nuclear war is likely enough to warrant MIRVing China's nuclear arsenal. Doing so could easily alarm the rest of the world. At the moment, budgeting for conventional weapons development takes priority. Perhaps one day when DF-21D is proven, they will integrate the technical capability of MIRV with that of MaRV for a new DF-31 variant.

Thank you for condensing my ramble.

Like I have repeated millions of times already, there's a difference between able to vs achieving it.

Ballistic vests are very cost effective accessories. They are cheap and easy to manufacture, but somehow they are just not mass equipped.

You are right. China cannot develop MIRV. China can only launch 3 satellites with 1 rocket in 1981 into discrete orbits, which has absolutely no relation to MIRV :lol:

I can't post links so just google "China multiple satellite launch 1981"

China absolutely has no bulletproof vests. That is because bulletproof vests are high tech Western things, and low tech copy paste China cannot make them. China only has things that look like, and function like, bulletproof vests, but are not bulletproof vests.

Thoroughly read it before you reply. You didn't even get my message.

 

[below_freezing]

Thank you for condensing my ramble.

Like I have repeated millions of times already, there's a difference between able to vs achieving it.

Ballistic vests are very cost effective accessories. They are cheap and easy to manufacture, but somehow they are just not mass equipped.



Thoroughly read it before you reply. You didn't even get my message.

Yes I did. Your message was asserting that China did not have the capability to develop and deploy MIRVs. I countered that with a fact. None of us know for sure if China can develop and deploy MIRVs, as the only countries to have carried out actual MIRV tests, photographed the results and published them is the US and the USSR (not Russia; does this mean Russia lost the capability to make MIRVs? Something to ponder), but there is evidence that China has done something related and arguably more difficult.

You also asserted that ballistic vests are not widely equipped. My counter assertion is that in real combat training (vs. physical training), ballistic vests are worn. They are less bulky and more flexible than the Western counterparts in fact, from photos easily accessible on google.